The Pandemic Shift
When COVID-19 forced courts, firms, and clients to adapt, we went home. Our homes became offices and our laptops connected us. Hearings, mediations, and staff and client meetings moved online, sometimes without regard for traditional schedules. The expectation of 24 / 7 availability became common, both for lawyers and workers in the broader economy.
While technology enabled continuity, it also erased boundaries. Many employees found themselves working longer hours with fewer natural breaks. The consequences were significant: heightened stress, increased burnout, and less time for the reflection necessary to provide sound legal judgment. For example, a 2021 survey by the American Bar Association found that nearly 70 % of lawyers reported difficulty disconnecting from work, and 30 % reported that the pandemic made work-life balance worse. 1 The National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being had already identified burnout and mental health struggles as systemic concerns even before COVID-19. 2 This culture exposes employers to significant risks.
Potential Employment Issues
1. When boundaries blur, employers don’ t just face potential morale problems they risk lawsuits, audits, and significant financial exposure. Here are some of the biggest landmines that exist for employers in the“ always-on” economy:
2. Misclassification Mistakes. Exempt vs. non-exempt is one of the blurriest lines in employment law. Employers who slap the“ exempt” label on remote staff without verifying that duties and salary thresholds are truly met with risk of costly misclassification claims. Courts have been particularly skeptical of law firms treating paralegals as exempt“ professionals.” When the line is drawn wrong, the liability isn’ t just a few hours here and there— it can mean years of unpaid overtime across an entire class of employees.
3. Breaks and Meal Periods. In a remote setting, the lines between“ on duty” and“ off duty” can blur, leading to missed meal breaks, interrupted rest periods, and inconsistent time records. Employees working from home might skip lunch or breaks due to back-to-back
1 American Bar Association, Practicing Law in the Pandemic and Moving Forward( 2021). https:// www. antitrustinstitute. org / wp-content / uploads / 2021 / 05 / ABA-Practice-Forward-Report-FI- NAL-4-26-2021. pdf.
2 National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being, The Path to Lawyer Well-Being: Practical Recommendations for Positive Change( 2017). https:// lawyerwellbeing. net / wp-content / uploads / 2017 / 11 / Lawyer- Wellbeing-Report. pdf
IN THE PROFESSION
virtual meetings, or they may take breaks without clocking out, leading to inaccurate records. Many state laws( e. g. California, New York, etc.) mandate meal and rest breaks for non-exempt workers, and failure to provide or ensure those breaks can trigger penalties. In the office, a manager might see who’ s taking a break; remotely, it’ s harder to monitor compliance. Some workers also extend their days irregularly – by, e. g., stepping away for personal tasks then logging back in at night – complicating what counts as“ work time.” Without robust tracking, employers risk underpaying hours( if an employee forgets to log back in) or not paying the premium pay required when a legally-mandated break is missed. On-call time is another concern in a hyper-connected environment: if an employee is expected to remain available and responsive( checking Teams or email constantly), that waiting time may be deemed compensable work time depending on how restricted the employee is.
4. Leave Interference. Ubiquitous connectivity can undermine protected leave by subjecting employees to work requests or interruptions when they should be fully off duty. Under the Family and Medical Leave Act( FMLA), eligible employees are entitled to uninterrupted, job-protected leave for qualifying reasons – and any employer interference can spark legal claims. An always-available culture may lead supervisors to contact an employee on FMLA leave with“ quick questions,” send emails, or even ask if they can jump on a call. These seemingly small requests can amount to FMLA interference if they require the employee to perform work while on leave. Similarly, under the Americans with Disabilities Act( ADA), if an employee is on a disability-related leave or has a reducedhours accommodation, pressing them to respond to messages outside their agreed schedule could be seen as a failure to accommodate. There’ s also a flip side: denying remote work as an accommodation when it’ s viable. Post-pandemic, employees have requested remote or hybrid arrangements for health reasons( e. g. immune disorders, anxiety) – if an employer unreasonably refuses and insists on office time, that could trigger an ADA claim.
5. Accurate Recordkeeping. The Department of Labor has warned repeatedly that employers must exercise“ reasonable diligence” in tracking hours worked remotely. Recent guidance even flags AIdriven monitoring tools as potential compliance traps, especially if they auto-deduct time or misinterpret idle computer periods. Courts, too, are narrowing the wiggle room for example, finding that the workday begins once a required program is launched, not just when the clock says 9:00 a. m. The trend is clear: regulators and judges expect employers to manage blurred lines proactively, not plead ignorance.
www. atlantabar. org THE ATLANTA LAWYER 11